Summary:This multiplayer-focused expansion pack features more maps, more vehicles, and more fighting forces. The Road to Rome focuses exclusively on the key Italian and Sicilian campaigns of WWII. Each map comes with highly detailed environments such as Italian houses, Mediterranean trees, and evenThis multiplayer-focused expansion pack features more maps, more vehicles, and more fighting forces. The Road to Rome focuses exclusively on the key Italian and Sicilian campaigns of WWII. Each map comes with highly detailed environments such as Italian houses, Mediterranean trees, and even the Monte Cassino Monastery. This expansion pack features eight new vehicles including the German BF-110 and British Mosquito twin-engine fighter-bombers as well as new Italian, British, and German tanks and anti-tank guns. Play as several infantry classes, controlling many weapons available to the Axis and Allies, and commanding numerous land vehicles, ships, and aircraft. The original Battlefield 1942 game is required to play The Road to Rome. [Electronic Arts]…Collapse

The stars of the show here are clearly the new maps. It's as if the team at Digital Illusions discovered exactly what everyone like about the game and created new battlefields made to directly stimulate the adrenal gland of its players. [May 2003, p.73]

While DICE probably should have included a few more maps, and some editing material so that modders could more easily build on what they've been provided (you can release that software developer's kit any time now, EA!), it's hard to argue with this expansion when everything included in it is so good.

Its a shame EA feel the need to charge their swelling community for the privilege of getting their hands on a smattering of new missions and models which should have been in the game in the first place.

Good expansion that gave us new transport, maps and weapons.
But paying for a DLC as much as for a stand alone game that had nothing elseGood expansion that gave us new transport, maps and weapons.
But paying for a DLC as much as for a stand alone game that had nothing else made many people unhappy. Great addition anyway!…Expand

Don't know why this is rated so high. All it does is add 6 new maps, new skins, sounds for soldiers, 6 or something Don't know why this is rated so high. All it does is add 6 new maps, new skins, sounds for soldiers, 6 or something vehicles...and...that's it. Not worth $20 IMO. There are like 20+ mods in development for BF1942, all of them (maybe for the exception of Desert Combat) will be available for free. I see no reason for buying the new exp pack either Secret Weapons or w/e. If they don't add more content that is. Come on, DICE has SDK, knowledge and all so why don't they use it? And why don't they release the fucking SDK?!??! Following is from www.bfcentral.com: This subject has simmered on the back burners of my mind for awhile. Recent conversations and events have brought it to the point where I want to say something about it. EA is blundering with Battlefield:1942. Will this cause the game to fail? Probably not, because it is a great game. Are they preventing the game from being all that it can be? I would say most definitely. Charging for expansions to a first person shooter type of game is not something that is taken very well by gamers who play this genre since so many other companies have a history of releasing awesome expansions and game additions at no additional cost. Road to Rome was released at a cost of around 20 American dollars. To the uneducated game purchaser (whom I suspect to be the ones that are putting RtR on the top seller lists) this may seem to be a small price to pay for the additional game play. There seems to me to be several ways to determine if such a piece of software is worth the money. One way is to compare it to the original Battlefield:1942 product. Does RtR offer half (since it costs approximately half as much) the gameplay that original BF offers? I think not. BF has extensive single player campaigns with story lines. BF has many more vehicles, maps, and classes to play as. RtR just doesn't add much to the original game. Another way to determine if the pricing schedule is equitable would be to compare RtR to expansions and additions to other first person shooter games. How many successful game expansions in this genre can you think of that actually cost money? To tell you the truth, I can't think of any. Not that there isn't, but if there is any they are definitely the exception to the rule. I can think of many game additions that were absolutely free. Counterstrike, Team Fortress Classic, Rocket Arena, etc. Now obviously there is nothing inherently wrong with charging for an expansion pack. In fact, RtR shows up on best-seller charts on a consistent basis. The only thing I can think of to explain this is that people who are buying it are the type of gamers who go to Wal Mart and pick out a game based upon the art on the box. I've spoke to several server admins who had to take RtR off of the server because of the drop in number of players who played there. All Seeing Eye currently shows that out of the 1877 servers it has data on only 469 of those have RtR on them. Desert Combat .3 has 580 servers and those servers are about 40% more populated then the RtR servers and it costs a grand total of zero dollars. You may be wondering what all this has to do with anything since RtR is old news. Secret Weapons shall soon be here. Well, I've heard rumors that Secret Weapons will cost in excess of 40 dollars. Regardless of the final price, I don't think EA is doing the game justice by selling these expansion packs. In fact, the game would be better off if EA/Dice didn't develop these packs at all. Why would I say that? Three reasons: Linux server, SDK, and reputation. Why is a Linux server so important? For one thing, many clans get their server by hiring a gaming server provider to run a port for them. Many, many game companies run Linux-only boxes. It is also much, much easier for people to throw up a server for this great game when they don't have to spend hundreds of dollars on a semi-stable OS just to run a game server. The SDK is also of great importance to both EA/Dice and us, the end-user. We all benefit from the release of awesome maps and mods. EA gets a game with a greater shelf life. I imagine Half-Life sells much better than does any other 5 year old game. It seems that perhaps the resources spent on these expansion packs could have been better spent on finishing the original game. Finally, we end up with reputation. I know of many gamers who were upset with what they got for the 20 dollars they spent on RtR. If Secret Weapons doesn't just blow people out of the water, EA is just going to further tarnish their reputation. Especially if they still don't have a decent Linux server and SDK. What am I trying to say with all this? Several things. Battlefield needs the Linux server and the SDK. Battlefield does not need the expansion packs, there are plenty of other mods under development that won't cost the end-user a dime. Those things don't make EA any money, though. Some may argue that making money is what a company is all about, and I would agree. Does that justify making money at the expense of providing gamers with a full-featured game? I don't have all the answers, but it seems to me that things aren't being handled in the best possible way when it comes to BF:1942 at EA. As I told someone recently, it seems like they are trading the long-term success of their game for short-term profitablity. What do you think? …Expand